Cato Article VII
Greetings Fellow UN Members,
The Cato Acts are up for vote in the UN. At first, I thought that these were a good set of laws (they seemed a lot like the Bill of Rights), but then I came across this article:
"Article VII- That no person shall be enlisted in the armed forces against his will, nor be forced into involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for a crime for which the said individual shall have been duly convicted."
My nation currently has a required period of military service for all citizens. I believe this resolution would directly hinder the defense of the Federation of Valdore. By today's United Nations Report, Valdore ranks 27,204th in the world for the largest defense forces per capita. Without the required military service, the defense of Valdore would sink to a new low.
This resolution is a great one in its other respects. I strongly agree with all of the other articles. However, Article VII would render many nations that depend on required military service defenseless. Some have said that in today's world, the size of a military doesn't matter as much as the technology used. This may be true, but for nations with less technology, a large military is the only route available.
For these reasons, I strongly urge all UN member nations to vote AGAINST this resolution. The resolution should be amended.
Thank you,
President of the Federation of Valdore
The United Socialist States of Krankheit strongly oppose this resolution in nearly its entirety. To propose that taxation empowers a citizen to make decisions solely because they pay their dues is preposterous! Taxation pays for their streets, their buildings, the operation of their cities. Thinking that you get "special rights" or "representation" only because you choose to obey the law is absurd. The Guiding Counsel whole-heartedly agrees with the noble Federation of Valdore on the subject of the banning of compulsory military service as well. Without the proper training and obediance that military service teaches, then there would be no applicable way to shape young citzens into the models of society that they must be to fully benefit a nation as a whole. To do away with this resource available to all would be a grossly short-sighted act of misguided good faith and is to be discredited in its entirety.
Strength In Arms, Strength In Unity,
Colonel Fyodor Konstantineski, Information Minister, Guiding Counsel
The United Socialist States of Krankheit
The Dominion of Ouranous was kind enough to remind me of a fact: The United Nations Charter DOES NOT give it the right to interfere with the internal affairs of its member nations. Therefore, the Cato Acts were completely invalid from the beginning. All the more reason to vote AGAINST them.
President of the Federation of Valdore
The Global Market
22-09-2003, 02:22
In modern warfare, numbers no longer matter. We had a 500-1 casualty ratio in Iraq. If two countries with similiar technology went to war it would be Mutually Assured Destruction. In addition, the NSUN is NOT the real UN. According to the FAQ, it is a governing body. That said Cato will fail anyways, so the whole point is moot. Vote for the Bill of No Rights!
You're assuming that both countries have weaponry capable of that. If two countries with the same fighting capabilities as the Iraqi army fought each other it would not be mutually assured destruction.
Likewise, it should be taken into consideration that not all nations roleplay with the same technological development levels as all other nations. I hardly expect a nation which doesn't roleplay with nuclear capabilities to be capable of espousing a MAD doctrine.
Smaptania
22-09-2003, 08:14
In modern warfare, numbers no longer matter. We had a 500-1 casualty ratio in Iraq.
These continued references to "Iraq" are quite a puzzlement to our government. The United States of Smaptania is not aware of the existence of any such nation, nor were we aware that The Global Market has gone to war with it. In what region is this nation located?
The United Socialist States of Calpooya utterly rejects the so-called Cato proposal. It is nothing but an attempt to distract the working class from its real political interest with a futile attempt to return to the liberal bourgeois policies of a bygone day.
The wheel of history has turned in favor of the working class and we do not need bourgeois promises (that will not be kept) to know what our rights are.
Vote no on this nefarious and insidious attempt to undermine the sovreign power of the working people of the world.
The Supreme Worker's Council
United Socialist States of Calapooya
Wilkshire
22-09-2003, 20:21
Greetings Fellow UN Members,
The Cato Acts are up for vote in the UN. At first, I thought that these were a good set of laws (they seemed a lot like the Bill of Rights), but then I came across this article:
"Article VII- That no person shall be enlisted in the armed forces against his will, nor be forced into involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for a crime for which the said individual shall have been duly convicted."
My nation currently has a required period of military service for all citizens. I believe this resolution would directly hinder the defense of the Federation of Valdore. By today's United Nations Report, Valdore ranks 27,204th in the world for the largest defense forces per capita. Without the required military service, the defense of Valdore would sink to a new low.
This resolution is a great one in its other respects. I strongly agree with all of the other articles. However, Article VII would render many nations that depend on required military service defenseless. Some have said that in today's world, the size of a military doesn't matter as much as the technology used. This may be true, but for nations with less technology, a large military is the only route available.
For these reasons, I strongly urge all UN member nations to vote AGAINST this resolution. The resolution should be amended.
Thank you,
President of the Federation of Valdore
I agree entirely. My nation also has compulsory military service, not just for the purposes of defence, but because I believe that two years in the military is an excellent way of educating young people, teaching them discipline etc. I fully support most parts of this resolution but I am forced to vote against it because of Article VII.